Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve
ASA 8-7.P makes it interference if an already retired or scored runner intentionally interferes; ASA 8-7.O makes it interference if a coach intentionally interferes. 8-7.O makes it clear that if the ball unintentionally hits the coach, it is not interference; and we know an unintentional hitting of the coach is not a blocked ball, it remains live. Base coaches are "engaged in the game", and are given (my words) certain partial immunity from accidental interference (other than keeping a fielder from fielding a batted ball for an out).
We also state that runners that are put out are not expected to go "poof"; they are there engaged in the game, at least until they are out, and have (again, my words) partial immunity from accidental interference. Using an expected (if not specified) consistency, I have to conclude that an equally unintentional hitting of a retired runner would also not be a blocked ball, and the ball would remain live. Retired runners are, in my mind, also engaged in the game to some degree; they are expected to be on the field, but they cannot interfere with impunity. Just as the coaching box and batters box are not safe havens, there are no safe havens defined for retired runners; but they don't go poof.
Now, I will extend my personal definition of intentional in these cases to include failing to avoid or failing to attempt to avoid if either are reasonably to be expected; but don't believe I have a blocked ball here without interference.
JMO; no black and white support available either way.
|
I don't disagree with anything Steve has posted. However, my opinion is based upon these five simple words "heading back to the dugout".
Even if you consider the retired player still engaged in the game, then they need to be "engaged" in the game. A retired offensive player has an obligation to be aware of and avoid being involved with continuing play. Being put out does not give a player Carte Blanche to just pop up and go to wherever it is s/he wants to go.
If a runner was forced at 2B on the front end of a 6-4-3 double play, popped up and enroute to the 3B dugout was hit by a throw back to pick-off a runner on 3B, we would be calling interference. If the catcher was chasing the ball and got tangled up with the retired player keeping her from making a play with a runner on the move, would that also be a live ball and play on?
We are not discussing a coach or runner going "poof" in the base line as the rules protect them because they are where they are supposed to be. Even the ODB stationed in a designated area is not protected and must avoid interfering with a live ball.
I can probably offer a dozen or more "what ifs", but there is no reason to waste the keystrokes.
Obviously, every scenario is an HTBT situation, but in this case, based on the information given, I'll stand on the blocked ball.